[TheTigerMaster]

That solution was not ideal, either:

1) A lot of riders would be diverted from BD subway to Eglinton LRT, causing a capacity crunch at both Eglinton LRT (approaching Yonge) and Yonge subway (from Eglinton to Bloor).

2) Finch LRT would be lost completely; while now it is on track.

The McGuinty-Ford ESCLRT would have collectively moved less people than the ECLRT + FWLRT + SELRT, and would have cost more to operate since the TTC wouldn't be able to eliminate much of our costly bus fleet. It was not the ideal solution.

 

[bobbob911]

Bellamy is there because it would be bad practice to conduct an corridor assessment to determine the best alignment and only analyze one alignment.

I don't understand why anyone is surprised that Bellamy, or any of the other adjacent corridors, was included as part of the project assessment.

The fact of the matter is that none of these alignments make any sense in the context of SmartTrack. And yet, you can take it to the bank that a)there *will* be a scarborough subway, and b)there will be something called SmartTrack built. And, where a directly competes with b, b will win because its Tory's plan.

Personally I doubt that there's much sensitivity of SmartTrack to the subway ridership numbers, and vie-versa - I think it's too different markets (so to speak).

The vision for SmartTrack is to be fully integrated with the TTC - fare integration, etc. The only difference will be 15 min headways, which seems like a big difference except they are scheduled where the TTC is not so the practical difference is smaller because you can time your trip.

 

[nfitz]

The vision for SmartTrack is to be fully integrated with the TTC - fare integration, etc. The only difference will be 15 min headways, which seems like a big difference except they are scheduled where the TTC is not so the practical difference is smaller because you can time your trip.

TTC headways are also scheduled. Now when subway is running every 2 minutes, doesn't matter much. But a 15-minute wait is huge ... and that's the scheduled wait - anyone who uses GO frequently knows that the train every 30 minutes can easily mean a 40-minute (or longer) wait for a train when something goes wrong.

Fare integration doesn't mean equal fares. AMT in Montreal has integrated fares with the metro - but not the same fares. GO Train and GO Bus fares are integrated - but you will pay more if you use both for the same trip (unless you only go a few blocks on the bus!).

 

[sixrings]

I don't see how people choose not to see the future of distance based fares with presto. Plus with presto they could charge different rates for subways, streetcars, busses, SMT. Once it's all digital they can do whatever they want. But people see what they want to see.

 

[bobbob911]

TTC headways are also scheduled. Now when subway is running every 2 minutes, doesn't matter much. But a 15-minute wait is huge ... and that's the scheduled wait - anyone who uses GO frequently knows that the train every 30 minutes can easily mean a 40-minute (or longer) wait for a train when something goes wrong.

They may be scheduled by the TTC, but the schedule is not knowable in advance to plan your trip. Agreed not a big deal when the headway is 2 minutes but when its 6 or more it can be. Mainly, my point is that because you know when the GO train is arriving, you can show up 5 minutes before it gets there - you are rarely waiting for 15 minutes.

I take the Lakeshore East GO train every day for 8 years and I can tell you the number of times I have had to wait more than 10 minutes due to delay I can count on both hands.

Fare integration doesn't mean equal fares. AMT in Montreal has integrated fares with the metro - but not the same fares. GO Train and GO Bus fares are integrated - but you will pay more if you use both for the same trip (unless you only go a few blocks on the bus!).

Fair point - it is still to be determined how fares will integrate. Probably, the cost of the GO fare will include a free transfer to/from TTC.

 

[crs1026]

And yet, you can take it to the bank that a)there *will* be a scarborough subway, and b)there will be something called SmartTrack built. And, where a directly competes with b, b will win because its Tory's plan.

Well, don't underestimate the ability of politicians to make a 180 degree turn in 3-degree increments. I sense that much is still negotiable, especially since "SmartTrack" is so nebulously defined. But yes, I fear that delivery of a subway has to happen or political careers will suffer.

The vision for SmartTrack is to be fully integrated with the TTC - fare integration, etc. The only difference will be 15 min headways, which seems like a big difference except they are scheduled where the TTC is not so the practical difference is smaller because you can time your trip.

If they could shave the headway to 10 minutes, it would be impossible to differentiate from any other TTC service. Headways less than 10 minutes become hard to measure or maintain anyways.

The one thing everyone seems to agree on is that LRT lines are needed radiating eastwards from Kennedy Station (On Eglinton, and perhaps up Kingston Road) and from STC (To Malvern, and other places). The ability to fund these in the "near" future seems to hang in the balance of whether to build lots of subway south or west of the STC. Logic would say any money that can be saved on subway construction can be turned towards those lines.

Extending the Bloor Subway appears to have only one real net benefit: making Scarborough a more attractive and convenient bedroom community for folks who want to work in the city center. Whereas serving growing development on Eglinton and on Sheppard potentially brings jobs to Scarboro and opens up the possibility that people might not need to commute downtown at all, and it connects Scarberians to places they can't easily reach today - such as North York, York University, Vaughan, and eastwards to Durham. So if subway has to happen, let it happen on Sheppard. Personally I would prefer LRT up there - seamless from Spadina to Malvern - but if it has to be subway to cater to Scarberian sensitivities, so be it. A Smarttrack/RER system that handles the north-of-Steeles commuters, and links STC to Kennedy, and provides an alternative to a Kennedy-Blooy/Yonge routing (thus giving some short term relief while the Relief Line is planned and funded and built) makes more sense to me than the SSE.

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

Probably, the cost of the GO fare will include a free transfer to/from TTC.

I very much doubt it. Transfers to other agencies where they have put in place fare integration cost ... I think MiWay is 80¢ now.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Stopping the subway at Scarborough Centre may be a reasonable modification, since the diversion of some commuters from Markham to SmartTrack might reduce the demand at Sheppard & McCowan station.

However, if the subway stops at STC, I would also consider restoring the eastern section of SLRT. Basically, I would look at the LRT line that starts at STC, runs to Centennial Progress campus, then crosses Sheppard and runs to Malvern Centre; with a possible branch to the Zoo.

Such shifted to the east LRT could both improve the subway ridership count, and address one of the issues with subway (that it is not useful enough for the riders who live in the north-east of Scarborough).

If we cut back the Scarborough Subway Extension to STC, saving approximately $720m, but instead wanted to use that $720m towards a LRT system for Scarborough, how much could that buy?

One thought that I had was to analyze two different scenarios. In scenario one, the SSE is cancelled, but the approved council funding (of $3.6b, I believe?) is used towards an LRT system. In scenario two, Line 2 is extended to Scarborough Town Centre, and the remainder of the funding used for LRT system for Scarborough that feeds into STC. The first question would be, what does each network look like with the funding? And the second question would be to look at the potential ridership of both scenarios.

We really should've used the incremental money to build the original Ford-McGuinty plan... underground or elevated Eglinton East line between Laird and Kennedy, and keep the SRT all the way to Centennial College + Sheppard.

That solution was not ideal, either:

1) A lot of riders would be diverted from BD subway to Eglinton LRT, causing a capacity crunch at both Eglinton LRT (approaching Yonge) and Yonge subway (from Eglinton to Bloor).

2) Finch LRT would be lost completely; while now it is on track.

My thoughts:

Scenario 1 (subway is cancelled entirely):
- Provincial funding (about $1,6B) will remain in place, to build SLRT (they can't reject it).
- Federal funding (about $700M) will be taken away, and not available for LRT. Potentially, it could be re-purposed for another high-visibility city project, such as SmartTrack or DRL.
- Municipal funding (about $900M) will disappear entirely. Resentful Scarborough councilors would join forces with tax opponents from all over the city.

Scenario 2 (subway is shortened to STC, but LRT is added): although I see merits in that scenario, I cannot claim that it is a boon for other LRT lines. All funding has to remain in place (that's not guaranteed but hopefully achievable), and the $700 or so spared from the subway will have to be spent on LRT. The LRT section from STC to Sheppard will have to be costly (elevated, plus a short tunnel under 401). From Sheppard & Progress to Malvern Centre, it might be possible to reduce costs by running on surface along Sheppard and then Neilson instead of tunnelng. Anyway, there won't be any leftover for the Kingston Road LRT or anything; such projects would have to be funded separately.

Ridership: I expect Scenario 2 to lead to somewhat higher ridership than the SLRT-only option. The reason is that in either scenario, many people will still take a bus to STC. A direct subway connection to STC will attract more riders (but not dramatically more, as most of the potential riders are on transit already.

The McGuinty-Ford ESCLRT would have collectively moved less people than the ECLRT + FWLRT + SELRT, and would have cost more to operate since the TTC wouldn't be able to eliminate much of our costly bus fleet. It was not the ideal solution.

If we cut the subway back to STC, it becomes a reasonable only 1.8 billion dollars. Going to Sheppard is what makes this a waste of money clearly. So the issues how to cut the subway back without political backlash. Keep in mind, if cost are reduced in half that is freed up. It can be used for the DRL. Finch was never really canceled. The starting date was moved around. Now that's its official, that won't happen again.

 

[bobbob911]

Extending the Bloor Subway appears to have only one real net benefit: making Scarborough a more attractive and convenient bedroom community for folks who want to work in the city center.

There is renewed talk of trying to increase jobs in Scarborough, and in particular around the STC. So, I think the belief is there would be two way commuting on that line. I personally think the chances are low of spurring that development, but it seems to be Tory's emphasis.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

TTC headways are also scheduled. Now when subway is running every 2 minutes, doesn't matter much. But a 15-minute wait is huge ... and that's the scheduled wait - anyone who uses GO frequently knows that the train every 30 minutes can easily mean a 40-minute (or longer) wait for a train when something goes wrong.

Fare integration doesn't mean equal fares. AMT in Montreal has integrated fares with the metro - but not the same fares. GO Train and GO Bus fares are integrated - but you will pay more if you use both for the same trip (unless you only go a few blocks on the bus!).

Well, don't underestimate the ability of politicians to make a 180 degree turn in 3-degree increments. I sense that much is still negotiable, especially since "SmartTrack" is so nebulously defined. But yes, I fear that delivery of a subway has to happen or political careers will suffer.



If they could shave the headway to 10 minutes, it would be impossible to differentiate from any other TTC service. Headways less than 10 minutes become hard to measure or maintain anyways.

The one thing everyone seems to agree on is that LRT lines are needed radiating eastwards from Kennedy Station (On Eglinton, and perhaps up Kingston Road) and from STC (To Malvern, and other places). The ability to fund these in the "near" future seems to hang in the balance of whether to build lots of subway south or west of the STC. Logic would say any money that can be saved on subway construction can be turned towards those lines.

Extending the Bloor Subway appears to have only one real net benefit: making Scarborough a more attractive and convenient bedroom community for folks who want to work in the city center. Whereas serving growing development on Eglinton and on Sheppard potentially brings jobs to Scarboro and opens up the possibility that people might not need to commute downtown at all, and it connects Scarberians to places they can't easily reach today - such as North York, York University, Vaughan, and eastwards to Durham. So if subway has to happen, let it happen on Sheppard. Personally I would prefer LRT up there - seamless from Spadina to Malvern - but if it has to be subway to cater to Scarberian sensitivities, so be it. A Smarttrack/RER system that handles the north-of-Steeles commuters, and links STC to Kennedy, and provides an alternative to a Kennedy-Blooy/Yonge routing (thus giving some short term relief while the Relief Line is planned and funded and built) makes more sense to me than the SSE.

- Paul

Every second train will be turned back on Kennedy on any alignment that is not the STC corridor. So the subway will be every ten minutes, not five. Most of the time.

 

[nfitz]

If we cut the subway back to STC, it becomes a reasonable only 1.8 billion dollars. Going to Sheppard is what makes this a waste of money clearly.

Simply upgrading the existing SRT and buying new vehicles is only 0.4 billion. Half of that was for the new vehicles.

The waste of money is going to subway.

Every second train will be turned back on Kennedy on any alignment that is not the STC corridor. So the subway will be every ten minutes, not five. Most of the time.

Most people travel in rush-hour. If they turn half the trains in rush-hour, there'll be a train every 4 minutes (if they meet the planned increase to a train every 2 minutes - currently it's 2 minutes 21 seconds in AM peak).

TTC doesn't schedule trains to short-turn outside of rush-hour, and it's the rush-hour that sets the number of trainsets they need. There's no indication that off-peak service would be turned, and that the current maximum scheduled interval of less than 5 minutes will change.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Simply upgrading the existing SRT and buying new vehicles is only 0.4 billion. Half of that was for the new vehicles.

The waste of money is going to subway.

Don't disagree but that's what was chosen unitl stated otherwise, right? We can bring the costs down if we can.

Most people travel in rush-hour. If they turn half the trains in rush-hour, there'll be a train every 4 minutes (if they meet the planned increase to a train every 2 minutes - currently it's 2 minutes 21 seconds in AM peak).

TTC doesn't schedule trains to short-turn outside of rush-hour, and it's the rush-hour that sets the number of trainsets they need. There's no indication that off-peak service would be turned, and that the current maximum scheduled interval of less than 5 minutes will change.

Heard from inside sources during the campaign. Besides wouldn't running every train to Sheppard/McCowan be a waste of money? It will also make train trips on the Bloor Danforth longer.

 

[nfitz]

Heard from inside sources during the campaign. Besides wouldn't running every train to Sheppard/McCowan be a waste of money

Heard what from what campaign? How is this anymore a waste of money to running all trains to Downsview off-peak? Or running trains on Sheppard at the same frequency off-peak as peak?

It will also make train trips on the Bloor Danforth longer.

How? Off-peak travel time west of Kennedy would be unchanged. Frequency would be unchanged.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Heard what from what campaign? How is this anymore a waste of money to running all trains to Downsview off-peak? Or running trains on Sheppard at the same frequency off-peak as peak?

Tory. And Downsview has higher ridership then a Lawrence McCowan station would.

How? Off-peak travel time west of Kennedy would be unchanged. Frequency would be unchanged.

How do you plan to maintaint the same travel time fron Kennedy to Kipling if it takes an extra 10 min from Kennedy to STC?

 

[nfitz]

And Downsview has higher ridership then a Lawrence McCowan station would.

Downsview has same ridership (38.8K) to the current Lawrence East and Scarborough Centre/McCowan stations (38.7K); and that's predicted to increase a bit once there's no change at Kennedy (and no incentive to take bus all the way to Kennedy).

Looking at the TTC study which compared using the current SRT just to McCowan to a 2-stop subway to Scarborough Centre, there was a 24.7% peak-hour ridership increase just by converting to subway. Assuming this holds for the entire day, then 38.8K would become 48.1K - far higher than Downsview.

That same study also notes explicitly that only half the trains would go past Kennedy at peak - but that during "off-peak periods, there would probably be no need to change trains (on the basis of TTC minimum frequency standards for subway operation)".

Incidentally, the same study also predicts what would happen to ridership on the existing RT if the Sheppard subway was built from Don Mills to Scarborough Centre. The RT ridership would go up marginally (about 2%). So much for the theory of some that building the Sheppard subway to Scarborough Centre is an alternative to the SRT.

How do you plan to maintaint the same travel time fron Kennedy to Kipling if it takes an extra 10 min from Kennedy to STC?

You'd run more trains. There's no shortage of trains off-peak, just peak - which is why some are short-turned.